RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           7 December 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004105171


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John E. Denning               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. James B. Gunlicks             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of his request to be
awarded the Purple Heart (PH).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was wounded in action while serving
in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).  He states that in the Spring of 1997, he
sustained an injury to his knee as a result of a mine explosion.  He claims
that he was awarded the PH, but it was not included in the list of awards
on his separation document (DD Form 214).

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a correction to
his separation document (DD Form 215) in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records that were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR2002068089 on
7 May 2002.

2.  During its original deliberations on this case, the Board found no
evidence to show the applicant was wounded in action or treated for a
combat related wound. As a result, it concluded there was insufficient
evidence to support award of the PH.

3.  The applicant’s record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered
active duty on 27 January 1966.  He held and served in military
occupational specialty (MOS) 64B (Heavy Vehicle Driver) and the highest
rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist five (SP5).

4.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he
served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 1 October 1966 through 30
September 1967.  During this RVN tour, he was assigned to Company B, 15th
Engineer Battalion.  Item 40 (Wounds) is blank and Item 41 does not include
the PH in the list of earned awards.

5.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no
orders or other documents indicating he was ever wounded in action, or that
he was recommended for or awarded the PH.

6.  On 26 January 1968, the applicant was released from active duty at the
expiration of his term of service after completing 2 years of active
military service. The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued did
not include the PH with the authorized awards listed.  The applicant
authenticated this document with his signature on the date of his
separation.

7.  In connection with the processing of this case, a member of the Board
staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty List, which
contains the list of reported RVN battle casualties.  The applicant’s name
was not included on this casualty roster.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the
regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent
part, that the PH is awarded to any member who has been wounded or killed
in action. A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an
outside force or agent sustained under conditions defined by this
regulation.  In order to support awarding a member the PH, it is necessary
to establish that the wound, for which the award is being made, required
treatment by a medical officer.  Records of medical treatment for the wound
must support this treatment or injury received in action, and must have
been made a matter of official record.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he sustained a knee injury as a result
of a mine blast in the RVN and is entitled to the PH as a result was
carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in order to award the PH it
is necessary to establish that a soldier was wounded as a result of enemy
action, that the wound required treatment by a medical officer, and that
the record of medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

2.  The evidence of record provides no confirmation that the applicant was
ever wounded/injured in action, or that he was ever recommended for or
awarded the PH.  Item 40 of his DA Form 20 is blank, indicating he was
never wounded or injured in action and there are no documents or orders on
file that indicate he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH.

3.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not include the PH in the list of
authorized awards and he authenticated this document with his signature.
His signature indicates he verified the information the separation document
contained, to include the list of authorized awards, was correct at the
time the DD Form 214 was prepared and issued.
4.  Finally, the applicant’s name is not included on the Vietnam Casualty
Roster.  The absence of his name from this official DA list of RVN battle
casualties would indicate he was never wounded/injured in action.  As a
result, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH
has not been satisfied in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__MDM_   __JED_ _  __JBG___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of
the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR2002068089 on 7 May 2002.




            ____Mark D. Manning____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004105171                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |AR2002068089  2002/05/07                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2004/12/07                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1968/01/26                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  61   |107.0015                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]